Haryana

Charkhi Dadri

CC/47/2023

Roshni - Complainant(s)

Versus

DHBVN through its Managing Director - Opp.Party(s)

Sh. Amit Kumar Dagar

10 Jul 2024

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, CHARKHI DADRI. 

                                                          Complaint No.: 47 of 2023.

                                                         Date of Institution: 22.03.2023.

                                                          Date of Order: 10.07.2024.

Roshni wife of Shri Jagbir, resident of village Morwala, now Ghikara Road, near Acid Factory, Charkhi Dadri, Tehsil & District Charkhi Dadri.  Mobile No. 80598-19693

                                                                   …..Complainant.

                    Versus

1. Managing Director, D H B V N, Vidhyut Nagar, Hisar.
2. Deputy G. M. (Executive Engineer), D.H.B.V.N., Charkhi Dadri.
3. A. G. M. (S.D.O.), D.H.B.V.N., Sub Division B36, Atela Kalan, District Charkhi Dadri.

…...Opposite Parties.

 

                   COMPLAINT UNDER THE

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT.

 

Before: -      Hon’ble Mr. Manjit Singh Naryal, President.

                   Hon’ble Shri Dharam Pal Rauhilla, Member.

                  

Present:       Shri Amit Kumar Dagar, Advocate for the complainant.

                   Shri Bijender Singh, Advocate for the OPs.

 

ORDER:-

                   Brief facts of the case are that the complainant is having electricity connection No. 4277901000 with sanctioned load of 3.00 KW and paying the bills regularly.  It is averred that meter of complainant has become defective in the month of June/July, 2019, as the bill dated 25.7.2019 has been issued by the OPs on MMC basis.  It is further averred that the complainant has deposited Rs.100/- for installation of new meter.  It is further averred that the OPs have installed new meter in the month of November, 2020, whereas the same had to be installed within 7 days from the date of moving application and deposit of meter installation fee.  It is further averred that in the month of July, 2022 all of sudden the OPs have issued bill dated 30.10.2022 for an amount of Rs. 44,740/- showing consumed units 344.6 (New 4420.8 - old 4076.2).  It is further averred that the complainant visited the office of OP No.3 and requested to correct the bill dated 30.10.2022, but OPs have get deposit the current bill of Rs. 1115/- and issued receipt dated 9.11.2022.  It is further averred that the OPs have again issued a wrong bill dated 31.12.2022 for an amount of Rs. 45,581/- showing consumed units 166.4 by adding an amount of Rs. 44,931/- as arrears.  It is further averred that the complainant has visited the office of the OPs for several times with the request to correct the wrong bill, but again no action was taken by them.  It is further averred that the complainant had filed a complaint before Chairman CGRF-cum-Superintending Engineer, Bhiwani and they passed order dated 31.1.2023 directing the SDO to overhaul the account, showing an amount of Rs. 43,009/- instead of Rs.48,821/-, as per calculation given by SDO.  It is further averred that the order dated 31.1.2023 is also illegal and liable to be set aside.  It is further alleged that the OPs have issued bill dated 5.3.2023 for Rs. 47,612/- showing Rs. 46,945.94 as arrear payable on 15.3.2023 and after due date Rs.49,037/-, which is wrong, illegal and liable to be set aside.  It is further averred that the complainant had made requests to the OP No. 3 for checking the meter, but they did not check the same because neither the notice was given nor the copy of checking report of meter supplied to the complainant.  It is further averred that as per rules of the OPs department, the meter must be checked in the lab in the presence of consumer, but the OPs have failed to do so.  It is further averred that the consumption of the complainant’s new meter is very low i.e. 344.6 units in bill dated 30.10.2022 for 60 days, 166.4 units in bill dated 31.12.2022 for 62 days and then 129.7 units in bill dated 5.3.2023 for 64 days, which itself shows that consumption of electricity of the complainant is very low.  It is further averred that the OPs were requested many times to correct the bills of the complainant by taking 6 months average of new meter, but they did not pay any heed towards her request, which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the OPs.  Hence, this complaint.

2.                On appearance, the OPs filed contested written statement denying the allegations of the complainant.  It is averred that the MCO of complainant’s connection was affected on 20.9.2020, as the meter was faulty, old reading of meter serial No. 7207398 were 14654 units.  It is further averred that the status of meter was faulty, hence, the bills from April, 2019 to February, 2021 were prepared on average basis.  It is further averred that when the MCO was transferred to LOR Team, CBO office Hisar, then the LOR Team, CBO office Hisar opined to transfer a sum of Rs. 48,821/- in the account of consumer, the complaint of which was made by the consumer to CGRF.  It is further averred that during the hearing before CGRF, the Chairman CGRF ordered to furnish recalculation sheet after overhauling the account from DOC to MCO.  It is further averred that accordingly the account of the consumer was overhauled on 1.9.2022 and found the chargeable amount of Rs.43,009/- and calculation sheet was present before the Chairman CGRF.  It is further averred that the Chairman CGRF made this amount final and ordered to charge a sum of Rs.43,009/- instead of Rs. 48,821/- from the account of consumer.  It is further averred that an amount of Rs.5812/- was deducted from account of consumer, as per the order of Chairman, CGRF and the consumer is bound to deposit the amount in question alongwith current bills.  Thus, there is no deficiency in service on the part of OPs and prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs.

3.                Ld. Counsel for the complainant to prove his case placed on record the duly sworn affidavit of the complainant as Ex. CW1/A and documents Annexure C1 to C10 and closed the evidence. 

4.                 Ld. Counsel for the OPs in support of its case has placed on record the duly sworn affidavit as Ex. RW1/A documents Annexure R1 to R7 and closed the evidence.

5.                We have heard ld. counsel for both the parties at length and gone through the case file very carefully.

6.                After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and having gone through the material/facts and documents available on the records, we are of the considered view that the complaint in hand deserves acceptance, because there is deficiency in service on the part of OPs.  It is admitted by the OPs in their written statement that the meter of the complainant was faulty/defective and hence, they replaced the same with new one.  But the OPs have failed to get tested the old meter in laboratory to show any unauthorized use of electricity and tempering of meter by the complainant.  It is also admitted by the OPs in their written statement that the bills from April, 2019 to February, 2021 were prepared on average basis and LOR Team, CBO office Hisar had transferred a sum of Rs.48,821/- in the account of complainant, which was lateron reduced to Rs.43,009/- by the Chairman, CGRF.  The plea of the complainant is also the same that her meter becomes defective.  Moreover, the OPs have not get tested the old meter from a laboratory to show any fault on the part of complainant and also to show unauthorized use of electricity or tempering of meter by the complainant.    

7.                From perusal of record, it is clear that the complainant has fully proved his case by placing on record certain documents Ex. C1 to Ex. C10.  It is proved on record that the complainant has moved an application Ex. C8 to OPs for correction of her bills.  It reveals from the bills placed on file as Ex. C5, C7 & C10 for the period from October, 2022 to March, 2023 that the aggregate consumption is 640 units in 186 days and based on which monthly average consumption arrives at 106 units approximately. It clearly proves that the old meter was faulty.  Further, average units consumed arrive at 106 units per month, as evident from bills placed on file as Ex. C5, C7 & C10 for the period from October, 2022 to March, 2023, after installation of the new meter.  So after considering all the above mentioned important issues, we came to the conclusion that the OPs liable for errors & negligence committed on their part.  It is the bounden duty of the OPs to get check functioning of old meter of the complainant in her presence, after giving prior notice to her, but the OPs have failed in testing the old meter.  Moreover, from the perusal of bills & documents, it is clearly established on record that the complainant was regular in depositing bills for consumed units as per bills issued by the OPs from time to time.  Further, the complainant has already deposited the payment of disputed period w.e.f. April, 2019 to February, 2021 issued on average basis by the OPs, which is quite justified.  This fact is also admitted by OPs in their written statement that the complainant has paid the bills issued on average basis w.e.f. April, 2019 to February, 2021.  So, it is clearly proved on record that the complainant was regular in paying the bills and she has put her all efforts for correction of bills, but the OPs are delayed the same on one pretext or the other.  The dispute arises only when the OPs have added an amount of Rs. 48,821/- in complainant’s account, which was lateron reduced to Rs. 43,009/- by Chairman, CGRF on the application of the complainant.  Thus, there is clear cut deficiency in service and unfair trade practice on the part of the OPs, as they have failed in Redressal of grievance of the complainant i.e. correcting the bills of complainant and overhaul her account as per the consumption shown by new meter. 

8.                Moreover, the OPs have deliberately does not settle the requests of the complainant in time and harassed her without any reason.  So, in our view, complainant is also entitled for compensation on account of mental, physical harassment and deficiency in service on the part of the OPs. Therefore, in view of facts and circumstances mentioned above, complaint of the complainant is allowed and the bills dated 30.10.2022, 31.12.2022 and 5.3.2023 are hereby declared as null, void and set aside.  The amount of Rs.43,009/- added by the OPs in the complainant’s account is hereby set aside directing the OPs to delete this amount from complainant’s account.  The OPs are directed:-

i)        To issue fresh bills to the complainant without adding/charging any surcharge by adjusting the amount, if any deposited by the complainant and to issue correct bills.

ii)       To pay Rs.1100/- as compensation on account of mental agony, physical harassment & hardship, due to deficiency in service & mal trade practice on the part of OPs and punitive damages as well as litigation charges.

          The compliance of the order shall be made within 45 days from the date of the order.  Certified copies of the order be sent to parties free of costs.  File be consigned to the record room, after due compliance.

Announced in open Commission.

Dated: - 10.07.2024.